James Comey Didn't Sink Hillary, Hillary Sank Hillary

Rather than smearing Comey, Clinton should be thanking him for not suggesting she be indicted.

Hillary Clinton was back earlier this week, taking "absolute personal responsibility" by blaming Russia, FBI Director James Comey and misogyny for her second presidential election loss. If the election had taken place on Oct. 27, Clinton maintained, she'd be president.

Perhaps if we were to all live in a vacuum where the electorate ignored everything the Democratic Party's flawed nominee said and did (and tried to hide), she would be in the White House—although even that's debatable.

Clinton's counterfactual tale about the infamous Comey letter has been a security blanket for many Democrats. But, as luck would have it, the FBI director was testifying in front of a Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, and he reminded us of some factors that Clinton ignored. That's because even if we concede that Comey's letter to Congress helped sink Clinton, Clinton deserved that letter and Comey had no choice but to send it.

In essence, what many Democrats have been arguing for the past six months is that Comey should have actively buried evidence that was pertinent to an ongoing congressional investigation—one that incidentally turned up plenty of potential wrongdoing—because it might hurt their preferred candidate's chances.

Comey confirmed that the FBI learned that classified emails were forwarded from Clinton's email account by Clinton aide Huma Abedin to her husband, former Rep. Anthony Weiner, so he could print them out. (This appears to be illegal, but perhaps all those immunity deals Comey was handing out came in handy.) Her computer, like other servers and laptops Clinton's staff tried to dispose of, hide, clean and whatnot, were supposed to have been in the hands of the FBI.

It's worth pointing out that everything in the Comey letter was almost surely going to leak anyway, not only because of its connection to the Clinton investigation but also because this "fella Anthony Weiner," as Comey referred to him, had access to classified information.

That may not have made things any better for Clinton, but it certainly would have made the FBI look like it was actively protecting a candidate—which is undoubtedly why Comey said it was potentially "catastrophic."

Whatever his political calculations, however, there was simply no reason for him not to apprise Congress of that kind of discovery. As an article by Newsweek pointed out at the time, Comey had an ethical obligation to inform Congress despite the best contrary efforts of overt partisans like Attorney General Loretta Lynch, not only because Department of Justice rules maintain that relevant committees should be apprised of new evidence but also because Comey had informed Congress that he had completed its review. Once he did that, and once he came into possession of significant evidence that would have to be examined by the FBI, Comey had a duty to notify Congress to amend his initial testimony, which was no longer true.

Setting all that aside, however, it's also worth reiterating that it was Hillary, not Comey, who initially set up a secret server to circumvent transparency, likely to hide favor trading related to her foundation. It was Hillary, not Comey, who sent unsecured classified documents through that server, which she almost surely knew was wrong. (The New York Times pointed out that chances are high these documents were intercepted by foreign powers.) It was Hillary, not Comey, who was responsible for attempts to destroy all evidence related to that server. It was Hillary's people, as Comey noted in his original congressional testimony, that had "cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery." And it was Hillary's aide who failed to inform the FBI about classified emails on her computer.

It was Hillary who ran a poor campaign and lost to one of the most unpopular presidential candidates in history. As former President Barack Obama's adviser David Axelrod pointed out Wednesday, she never took responsibility for any of it.

He said: "But Jim Comey didn't tell her not to campaign in Wisconsin after the convention. Jim Comey didn't say, 'Don't put any resources in Michigan until the final week of the campaign.' One of the things that hindered her in the campaign was a sense that she never fully was willing to take responsibility for her mistakes, particularly that server."

Moreover, as Comey basically admitted again today, Clinton had clearly broken the law. The only struggle was proving intent (though gross negligence was the standard). So rather than smearing Comey, Clinton should be thanking him for not suggesting she be indicted.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Damn straight. Like all such people, instead of thanking her lucky stars for Obama’s corrupt administration shielding her from Comey’s inconvenient truth, she keeps on drawing attention to her foibles by blaming others for her missteps.

I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

I suppose it was just a coincidence that Michelles best friend in college was hired by the Canadian company that screwed the pooch on the Obamacare website. They had been run off by the Brits and Canadian med system previously, making them the obvious choice! Results : months late and a 300 million dollar budget turned into 2 billion. Makes Solyndra look like a lemonade stand….

Damn straight. Like all such people, instead of thanking her lucky stars for Obama’s corrupt administration shielding her from Comey’s inconvenient truth, she keeps on drawing attention to her foibles by blaming others for her missteps.

Of course Comey didn’t cost Hilliary the election. Hilliary would do her legacy and her party a favor if she would own up to the fact that she’s a horrible candidate who ran a horrible campaign, and even had the benefit of an opponent who was practically begging to lose.

All that said, I think if the election were held today, knowing what we know now and even if Hillary/Trump ran the same kind of race, she wins.

It’s just a guess, and I barely care anymore, but I base this on four factors (keeping in mind that people didn’t expect Trump to win and it was a close election):

1) 7% of Trump supporters recently said they wouldn’t vote for him again. She’d get a portion 2) There are some third option voters who would switch to her 3) Some who didn’t vote for president or didn’t vote at all would go her way 4) Trump’s voters were already highly motivated and wouldn’t likely increase

But it’s over, we don’t elect people on October 28th, and she and the Dems haven’t done anything to endear themselves to anyone since election day either. So she’s just going to have to be happy with joining a long line of people who would’ve, could’ve, or should’ve, while her party deals with the fact that they were complicit in all this.

I am not surprised. I can remember every presidential election since 1964. There has not been a single GOP victory that the Democrats haven’t peremptorily blamed on some alleged dirty trick or unfair outside interference. Be it Russian interference, Swift Boating, “selected not elected,” Willy Horton, October Surprise, George Wallace “stealing” electoral votes from Hubert Humphrey, or Nixon “tricking” the Democrats into nominating a weak candidate in 1972 (an argument I heard throughout my college and law school years), it was never any substantive argument made by the GOP candidate and certainly never ever a flaw in the Democrat nominee. Even Reagan’s 1984 re-election landslide was attributed solely to Mondale’s “courageous” promise to raise taxes. Did anyone expect different this time?

Contrast this, generally, with Republicans’ introspective treatment of their own presidential candidate’s losses:

– H.W. Bush: despite soaring popularity after the Gulf War, the economy tanked, reasonably leading to his loss; – Bob Dole: lackluster candidate against reasonable-ish incumbent; – McCain: Swing-and-a-miss VOP nomination in addition to Bush fatigue; and – Romney: he should have hammered Obama during the debates when he had a chance.

Yeah, when Democrats lose, they blame Republicans. When Republicans lose, they blame Republicans. And with Romney, don’t forget the disastrous GOTV effort in the final days. That resulted in a lot of soul searching.

1) There is always buyers remorse. That 7% is basically saying they were unsure of their choice and remain so. 2) I was a third option voter who would switch to him. There are a lot of #nevertrump conservatives who are pleased with the SC pick, revolted by the progressive meltdown, and wouldn’t feel compelled to take as hard of a stand in the event of a recall-type vote. 3) And some would go his way. 4) But Hillary’s would? Who has she motivated since being defeated?

I think the Scott Walker recall election is instructive. More people showed up, and he slightly increased his lead.

All that said, I think if the election were held today, knowing what we know now and even if Hillary/Trump ran the same kind of race, she wins.

I remain dubious. Not that I want Trump to win (I didn’t and will never vote for either of them) and I am 10,000% admitting that arriving at any outcome is speculative fiction, but ‘knowing what we know now’ makes for a dramatic change in the way the race is/was done. Trump would be an even more serious contender and, for all the fake news, scandals, and organized protests Hillary would be right back in the fray.

e.g. 7% of Trump supporters said they wouldn’t vote for him but I guarantee you that a majority of them own guns or otherwise cleave strongly Team Red otherwise and would choose Trump/Pence/Gorsuch over Clinton/Kaine/[Garland]. I’m certain AntiFa riots would do Clinton no favors and I can’t imagine Trump wouldn’t flat out ask Hillary why Susan Rice wouldn’t testify in a debate.

Clinton lost and has rather effectively disappeared from the public eye, except for stupid obvious staging and (admittedly sketchy) polling/data indicates that she has *still* lost popularity since.

Despite Hillary’s popular vote win, the Republicans won the House vote by 1.5 million. I’m convinced that had any generic Republican won the nomination, they would have won the popular vote over Hillary.

Well it appears that David Axlrod gets part of it. But assume she never set up her own email server, and the democrats still share the blame for nominating the Titanic as their candidate. Although in fairness to the Titanic, at least it only sank once. Hillary was already so unlikable that given the choice between her and the loofah faced shit gibbon, most would have still voted for the shit gibbon.

A good point that shouldn’t be lost in all of this discussion is that Hillary ALMOST lost to a self-avowed socialist in the primaries, who until recently, had disavowed the Dem Party to be an independent.

Part of that is the anti-establishment mentality pervasive in this election cycle, but a big chunk of that is that she really wasn’t a very good candidate to begin with.

In reality Hillary was someone who never had to work hard for anything in her life. She married into politics, and got a political voice handed to her. She ran for the Senate in a can’t lose situation. She got beaten by a political nobody in a presidential primary, and then offered Secretary of State as a consolation prize.

It was clear as the author points out that she didn’t have a strong ground game in states that she should have won (Wisconsin and Michigan). Much like her voters she felt that she was entitled to the office of President, and didn’t put the effort in. Her voters didn’t turn out and she lost. I know it’s hindsight, but it shouldn’t be that surprising.

So let’s give her a participation trophy and move on. If Bernie won the establishment’s Globalists MSM would be beating the He!! out of a Democrat every day instead of a Republican. If President Trump’s only accomplishment ever was to beat all possible odds against both political parties and the entire left wing and V.R.W.C. and the entire Globalist establishment and their establishment MSM to save our national sovereignty he may have become our absolute presidential all time MVP on January 20, 2017. Just be glad Crooked Hillary’s wet dream got drygulched. The Globalist HRC proclaimed, “My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future…, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere,” Clinton told Banco Itau, a Brazilian bank. May 10, 2013. The last president I liked was Carter. The FED took him out with a 20% prime rate. Here we are 2 Democrats and 3 Republicans later and still: One sovereign nation indivisible under God. Even though I generally lean Bernie Sanders left I like it like that. One SOVEREIGN nation indivisible under God.

If Hillary had been fully willing to take responsibility for her mistakes, she would have had to drop out of the race. Either that, or she would have had to concede over and over while campaigning, that she had committed a felony.

Whatever. Hillary will have to take her lumps, but the fact is, once Comey decided to run his mouth, he should have revealed the Trump campaign was under investigation already for their ties with Russia. Him using the word conceal is loaded and he chose to use that word to try and manipulate this bullsh*t.

Comey needs to step down. He chose to do this for political reasons, and he has damaged the FBI. Personally I am far more pissed at Hills and and skank Schultz over what they pulled at the DNC. Schultz should be jailed for that.

So, what’s the latest on Trump’s “treason” with the Russkies? Tony been around to explain it? Has that guy who asked for immunity caused any new investigations? What about Trump’s “associates” “colluding” with the Russkies? Is the left ever going to admit they LOST? /s/ Judge Nappy

I would say that Hillary is correct in saying that Comey’s announcement was worth the few votes that swung MI, WI, PA & FL. That said, she and her “body person” Huma Abedin Weiner were incredibly sloppy in having “Carlos Danger” print out these e-mails, to say nothing of her whole Nixonian attitude throughout all this. You can’t blame the police for announcing evidence when you are so stupid as to create the evidence in the first place.

The not secret “secret” server, which ended up being more secure than the in-hindsight preferable options, was a one-time mistake, which has long been absolved. James Comey’s role in making it an issue days before the election, even though no wrongdoing was established, certainly affected the vote turnout. If a few thousand votes had gone another way in a couple states, everyone would be talking about the genius Clinton campaign and the sad fucks of the GOP who ran an incompetent manchild. All this hindsight bullshut is self-congratulations. I can think of Andrew Sullivan and a couple other professional contrarians who thought Trump would win beforehand. Other than them, nobody else. That’s why so much scrutiny was applied to Clinton and not Trump before the end.

Hillbilly forgot to campaign in the MIdwest where Sanders wiped the floor with her face in the primaries. She forgot to consult a map of the United States and she forgot to have any kind of message or policies for the millions of people there who would decide the election. Even her husband Bill, who succeeded in doing a lot more than groping, told her campaign staff that she needed to focus on the white working-class. A person too stupid to pass Campaign Strategy 101 is too stupid to be president. And that nails-on-a-chalk-board hectoring third-grade teacher voice. Clueless.